Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The latest rules in the rule book..

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The latest rules in the rule book..

    After listening to ETP-27, gt mentions that there's a 1m space requirement now.
    I thought this would be unusual, so I went looking to find it.
    There's a new rule book out and there are some things that I spotted that I hadn't seen before.

    There are also some things that were probably there before, but I didn't remember seeing them.

    Below are the things that I found interesting and are a mix of old and new. Italics and emphasis are mine..

    http://rulebook.worldarchery.org/PDF...1/EN-Book3.pdf


    11.3. For athletes of both divisions the following equipment is not permitted:
    11.3.1. Any electronic or electrical device that can be attached to the athlete's equipment.
    11.3.2. Any electronic communication device, headsets or noise reduction devices in front of the waiting line provided that the use of
    software that simply allows the athlete to plot arrow impacts on the target as one would on printed paper used for the same
    purpose is permitted. No software that aids in bow sight adjustments may be used anywhere on the archery field (which includes
    any space either in front of or behind the shooting line up to the spectator area).

    11.3.3. Athlete equipment shall not include camouflage colours of any kind.

    11.4. For Olympic Games no electronic communication device is allowed on the competition field unless required by the
    Organising Committee.

    14.2.6.3. Another arrow in the nock and remaining embedded therein shall score the same value as the arrow struck.

    14.4.1. Each target will have two scorecards one of which may be electronic. If there is a discrepancy in the arrow values between an
    electronic and a paper score card, the paper card will take precedence.
    The organisers are not required to accept or record scorecards that have not been signed, and/or do not contain the sum total,
    and/or the number of 10's and/or the number of X's (or 9s for indoor) and/or which contain mathematical errors.
    The organisers or officials are not required to verify the accuracy of any submitted scorecard, however if the organisers or the
    officials note an error at the time of submission, they will ask the athletes concerned to correct such error and the result as
    corrected will stand.
    Should a discrepancy be found in the sum total where:
    two paper scorecards are used, the sum total of the lower arrow scores will be used for the final result;
    if the score on a single scorecard (and in the case of double scoring, the score is the same on each scorecard), is lower than the actual score,
    the lower score on the scorecard will be used,

    one paper scorecard and one electronic scorecard are used, the total of the electronic scorecard will be used for total score,
    10s and Xs on the following conditions:
    a total score has been entered on the manual scorecard so verification is possible;
    in case no 10s and Xs (9s for indoor) are entered on the manual scorecard, no 10s and Xs (9s for indoor) are registered;
    in case no total score is entered on the manual scorecard when it is submitted to the results team, then the athlete shall
    be disqualified (individual/team and mixed team where applicable).

    21.12.10. For all international tournaments and/or those tournaments registered with World Archery, no "assistant" or "support" dogs will
    be permitted on the field of play.

    7.1.1.7. There shall be a mark on the shooting line directly opposite each target butt. There shall also be a number corresponding to that target butt between 1 and 2m in front of the shooting line. If two or more athletes are shooting at the same target butt at the same time, the shooting positions shall be marked on the shooting line. A minimum space of 80cm per athlete shall be guaranteed. Where athletes in wheelchairs are competing, additional space shall be necessary. ( 21.11.4 )
    Status is not defined by the amount of gear in your signature.
    Performance cannot be purchased.

    "The Internet offers everything - except quality control" - K. Anders Ericsson.


  • #2
    Originally posted by Andy! View Post
    11.3. For athletes of both divisions the following equipment is not permitted:
    .....
    11.3.2. Any electronic communication device, headsets or noise reduction devices in front of the waiting line provided that the use of
    software that simply allows the athlete to plot arrow impacts on the target as one would on printed paper used for the same
    purpose is permitted. No software that aids in bow sight adjustments may be used anywhere on the archery field (which includes
    any space either in front of or behind the shooting line up to the spectator area).
    I caused that one!!!
    At World Cup 1 in 2013 I used a fancy application I created to help the archers adjust their sights optimally.
    At WAC11 I also used it and by then the Netherlands had copied it.
    Then Norway complained and we were not subsequently permitted to do it.

    Actually that is a good thing since I can readily do the maths in my head, as can the Netherlands coach, so we will not be disadvantaged at all whereas others who cannot do the maths will be disadvantaged.
    Scout strings and stabilisers
    Accurate Sights
    Titan Scopes

    Comment


    • #3
      Yes.
      Artemis Lite has a little addendum where the WA rules committee clarified the use of sight adjustment software.
      I was suprised to see it addressed directly in a rule change, but hey, that's what they're for.
      Status is not defined by the amount of gear in your signature.
      Performance cannot be purchased.

      "The Internet offers everything - except quality control" - K. Anders Ericsson.

      Comment


      • #4
        no "assistant" or "support" dogs will be permitted on the field of play.
        Clare will be happy that support cats are legal
        Archery's a lot like Life .... a few see it as an opportunity to score cheap points; while the rest are focused on the ends that count.
        Genesis 21:20 And God was with the boy as he grew up in the wilderness. He became a skillful archer.

        Comment


        • #5
          See if we can get Jim to bring a support cat to the next world cup.....
          Status is not defined by the amount of gear in your signature.
          Performance cannot be purchased.

          "The Internet offers everything - except quality control" - K. Anders Ericsson.

          Comment


          • #6
            No, I will be too busy doing the illegal maths in my head - my cat would feel neglected.

            Actually, while it is a stupid rule, I am quite pleased that sight adjustment calculators are now banned. It gives me (and Marcel from the Netherlands) a substantial competitive advantage.
            We have put quite a bit of effort into knowing how to best adjust the sight to get the highest score and I am pretty sure that the average archer would not cope with the maths. I programmed the best algorithms so I could do it very quickly, but I can do it pretty well without the computer.
            Scout strings and stabilisers
            Accurate Sights
            Titan Scopes

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Andy! View Post
              See if we can get Jim to bring a support cat to the next world cup.....
              http://www.disabled-world.com/disabi...imals/cats.php

              I see no WA rule against them...
              Ultra Black (tm) High Performance Armguard Elastic Staff Non-Shooter

              We are all Atheists about most of the gods that societies have ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further. Richard Dawkins

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Clare Barnes View Post
                Customs & Quarantine could be a hurdle
                Style before fashion

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Ozzy View Post
                  Customs & Quarantine could be a hurdle
                  So how do you think horses can compete in a variety of countries?
                  Ultra Black (tm) High Performance Armguard Elastic Staff Non-Shooter

                  We are all Atheists about most of the gods that societies have ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further. Richard Dawkins

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I'd be interested in someone trying to enforce that rule in Australia against a determined disabled person

                    http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/c...992264/s9.html
                    http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/c...92264/s28.html

                    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
                    Et iurisperitus est iuvenis sagittarius

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Yep it seems to me that WA has missed the point in that one.


                      Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
                      Urban Archery
                      Carbon Express
                      Beiter
                      Truball/Axcel
                      Redback Strings

                      Before enlightenment: Chop wood, carry water
                      After enlightenment: Chop wood, carry water

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Clare Barnes View Post
                        So how do you think horses can compete in a variety of countries?
                        From experience, with a wad of paperwork, certificates and vet records that weighs just a little more than the horse does!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Andy,

                          To be precise, the 1M shooter space rule I mentioned in the podcast is in effect for all World Ranking Events, not all tournaments. I should have been more clear on that.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            From the creator of ArtemisLite, some history and a few points to ponder….

                            After a few false starts (one in 1997 on the Palm Pilot and in 2003 on the iPAQ 3630, windows CE), I started development of ArtemisLite back in 2010. The first official free version was downloadable from Google Play back in October 2011. I first used ArtemisLite myself, including its sight advice calculator, when coaching archers like Sjef van den Berg and Inge van Caspel at the World Championships in Las Vegas in 2012. In 2013 and 2014, I attended most of the Worldcups and Title tournaments where I tested ArtemisLite’s sight advisory function. I also had a few very intersting discussions with James Park on the subject (and many more....!). More and more archers from Team NL tested and use ArtemisLite (all of them only in practice) and mainly because of many other reasons than the, in fact, very simple sight advice function. The sight advisor function was tested and validated by both recurve and compound archers (e.g. Peter Elzinga and Mike Schloesser and many more, gave valuable feedback).

                            Just out of curiosity, in july 2014 I requested an interpretation on th euse of Artemis and its advisory functions from the judges of the Archery Association of the Netherlands and we (judges and myself) decided to put it to World Archery interpretation in August 2014.

                            My original interpretation request was three-fold: I wanted to know, if:

                            A) An archer is allowed to plot (and have the software advice on sight adjustments) whilst the device was attached to the tripod during competition (during actual shooting and spotting),
                            B) An archer is allowed to bring the device to the target and plot arrows at the target, then on walking back, get sight advice,
                            C) Have a coach use a (mobile) device, laptop or tablet and use the software during competition.

                            The third point C) we (judges from the Netherlands and myself included) assumed was an open door. Coaches may use whatever they like on the FOP as long as they don’t disturb athletes. At WA events I see coaches use (internet-enabled) laptops, tablets, mobile phones, pen and paper, etc., and nobody actually knows what they are doing, also due to language barriers. Are they checking their mail or checking facebook, uploading team status posts or writing notes or calculating sight adjustements. Nobody knows, nobody CAN know (again also due to language). So we decided to sent the interpretation without the use of the word coach, only the word “archer” was used.

                            Now, I agree with James Park that the calculations can be done from head quite easily which gives James and myself an edge And I also agree that the ruling is, let’s call it, challenging to uphold. This I discussed with many World Archery judges who actually feel the same. Which is the main problem; how to uphold a ruling like this?

                            Just a few of many scenarios I can think of, and how to uphold the ruling in these;

                            1) On the FOP, an archer uses an unknown app (in a language unreadable by the judge). How does the judge detect whether the archer is simply plotting like he/she would do with pen and paper or is using aids for sight adjustment? In fact, seeing your group on paper is ALSO an aid for sight adjustment.

                            2) On the FOP, a coach is using an app (like ArtemisLite) just for plotting arrows as he would do with pen and paper. However, ArtemisLite IS able to calculate sight advices, which the coach is NOT using. Is the coach in violation?

                            3) On the FOP, a coach is using an app (not being ArtemisLite) just for plotting arrows as he would do with pen and paper. However, it is unknown if this app can calculate sight advice as well. Is the coach in violation?

                            4) On the FOP, a coach (not athlete) is using an app (like ArtemisLite) AND is also using the sight advice function. Is the coach in violation, and if so, who will receive punishment (an archer from his team?)

                            5) On the FOP, a coach uses a radio communication device (which is allowed; more and more teams are using it to communicate between coaches e.g. on weather conditions etc.). One of the coaches is in the audience stands (in fact, not on the FOP) with a high powered spotting scope and software including sight advisory function. Sight adjustments are communicated through radio to the coach on the FOP.



                            As a final point; even though archers like Mike Schloesser and Peter Elzinga verified that the advice is really, really accurate, it still cannot beat them. These archers have one thing in favor to any algorithm and that is the experience, pin-position-feedback and shot feeling which they include in their “calculations” and that makes their “calculations” not always more accurate, but accurate enough and more importantly; faster (they need lesser shots to conclude they need adjustment) than the calculated advice.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Very good summary Marcel.
                              Scout strings and stabilisers
                              Accurate Sights
                              Titan Scopes

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X